-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
BBC: Tesla's 'Autopilot' misleading, Germany rules
- Thread starter NewbieT
- Start date
As a pilot, to me Autopilot doesn't mean play a video game, check on your dog or go sit someplace else in the plane.
And for those that can READ, before Autopilot is enabled your are well informed that it is BETA and you are not excused to take a nap!
Noted in the BBC article that Tesla is providing stiff competition to German car makers. Surely no connection to this decision
And for those that can READ, before Autopilot is enabled your are well informed that it is BETA and you are not excused to take a nap!
Noted in the BBC article that Tesla is providing stiff competition to German car makers. Surely no connection to this decision
I can't see full self driving capability anytime soon when even Autosteer isn't reliable without it cancelling itself every couple of miles or failing to keep within the lane.. That could be something to do with the poor lane markings around Bristol and Chepstow area though, but it is something that has to be taken into account for all road conditions.
The ridiculous thing about this decision is that it is solely based on the term 'Autopilot'.
FSD must stand for something else.
FSD must stand for something else.
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
More wisdom from our friend, colleage and co-religionist on the left coast. Right on, Mr Miserable
Euro NCAP also made a similar criticism of AP here:
"The name “Autopilot” implies a fully automated system where the driver is not required. However, the limited scenarios tested clearly indicate that is not the case, nor is such a system legally allowed."
"Overall, the Tesla system is primarily in control with a risk of driver becoming over-reliant on the system."
Not agreeing nor disagreeing, just saying.
"The name “Autopilot” implies a fully automated system where the driver is not required. However, the limited scenarios tested clearly indicate that is not the case, nor is such a system legally allowed."
"Overall, the Tesla system is primarily in control with a risk of driver becoming over-reliant on the system."
Not agreeing nor disagreeing, just saying.
Things like this baffle me a bit. Surely a misconception cannot be used to justify something legal. If I crashed on a country road and said it wasn't my fault because my understanding was that a 60MPH sign meant that I could go round ALL the corners at 60 I'd be laughed at. Autopilot is and always has been a driver/pilot aid designed to retain a set course/direction without human assistance. Which is exactly what it does. A Pilot doesn't turn autopilot on and then pop out the back for a sandwich and to watch the in flight movie. I'd possibly argue that it's more advanced than most aviation autopilot systems as it adjusts the speed and direction in accordance to its surroundings, and will actively try and avoid a collision.
So if you think autopilot means you don't have to do anything or pay attention then you have made a misconception as to what the word means.
So if you think autopilot means you don't have to do anything or pay attention then you have made a misconception as to what the word means.
12Pack
Member
Besides the politics, I think there’s an element of being lost in translation. I always viewed Tesla’s “Autopilot“ in an idiomatic sense, playing on the terminology used in aircraft, while the ruling seems to suggest it is taken to be a literal completely automatic piloting of the car.
And this has now come to a conclusion; the case failed and it was determined that the term "Autopilot" is not misleading:
teslamag-de.translate.goog
And from what I can tell the decision is final and can't be appealed.
Exklusiv: Deutsche Klage gegen Tesla-Werbung für Autopilot und FSD endgültig gescheitert
Ein deutscher Wirtschaftsverein wollte Tesla Autopilot- und FSD-Aussagen verbieten lassen – ist damit aber jetzt endgültig gescheitert.
teslamag-de.translate.goog
And from what I can tell the decision is final and can't be appealed.
Advertising regs is one consideration. Contract law - misrepresentation could effectively be breech of contract. I’d wager a judge would at least hear a case.
Similar threads
